The Trial of Jesus
When Judges Broke their Own Law
There is so much mysticism and confusion surrounding the crucifixion and resurrection that we lose sight of the fact that Jesus of Nazareth was a man tried before a court of men under laws of men, that he was convicted and executed as a man, and that for sheer drama the trial of Jesus surely matches any of the great courtroom stories in the history of human justice.
I approach this subject as a lawyer, not a theologian. I urge you to research on your own the theological aspects of the events. I think it leads to better spiritual insight to have a lawyer’s view of the processes of law that culminated in the death of Jesus on Calvary’s cruel cross.
At the outset I want to emphasize that I do not believe a race of people caused the death of Jesus. I don't believe any thinking Christian does. It is my opinion only a very few powerful men in Israel–mainly the chief priests of that nation–were responsible for the miscarriage of justice that occurred. To understand the enormity of that miscarriage we examine the Jewish law as it then existed … a truly magnificent system of criminal justice.
Under provisions of Jewish law there could be no conviction for a capital offense based on the testimony of less than two witnesses. One witness was the same as no witness at all. If there were only two witnesses, both had to agree in every particular to the last detail.
Under rabbinical law, the accused had the right to employ counsel (the forerunner of our guarantee of counsel in criminal prosecutions set forth in the 6th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States). If he couldn't afford a lawyer one had to be appointed for him. We think of the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Gideon v. Wainwright that gave rise to our public defender system as an innovation, when in reality this was the practice of courts at least 2000 years ago!
Under Mosaic law an accused could not be required to testify against himself. This is the soul of our 5th Amendment, "No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." Here is the concept of “taking the fifth”, part of criminal justice since the time of Moses!
A voluntary confession was not competent for conviction under Jewish law. The burden of proof is still on the State to establish that a confession, if given, was given freely, voluntarily, and intelligently. We require police officers to read the "Miranda warning" to an accused so the Court can determine if an admission was freely, voluntarily, and intelligently made. If confession is made after Miranda is heard and understood, a confession can be admitted. It was not so in Jesus’ day. Jewish law admitted no confession, believing the State could never rely on that which a person said from his own mouth.
Nor was circumstantial evidence admissible. One seldom sees a case in our courts today in which circumstantial evidence is not used. Evidence in many cases today is entirely circumstantial.
Hearsay evidence was not admitted then. We still have a rule against admitting testimony of witnesses who are not in court to be examined in person, however exceptions to our hearsay rule have virtually gobbled up the rule’s original protections for the accused.
The presumption of innocence our law recognizes today (i.e., that an accused is presumed innocent until his guilt is established by evidence to the exclusion of and beyond any reasonable doubt) also comes to us from Jewish law and was the rule when Jesus was unjustly crucified.
The accused in a capital case was required to be tried in the daytime and in public. This was the forerunner of our constitutional guarantee to a public trial.
No evidence could be produced except when the accused was present. This established the present day right of the accused to be confronted by the witnesses testifying against him.
Witnesses were not administered an oath. It was felt the Commandment "Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness" was sufficient to deter perjury. Lying in court was perjury–oath or no oath. Moreover, there were two additional deterrents to perjury: (1) any witness in a capital case who committed perjury was subject himself to the death penalty, and (2) if the accused in a capital case was convicted, the witnesses were required to attend the execution. Under this provision of law, witnesses generally chose their words cautiously and offered testimony only with great care!
The Sanhedrin
The Great Sanhedrin, the Jewish Supreme Court, was the only court with jurisdiction over crimes punishable by death. Establishment of the Sanhedrin is ascribed to Moses. It was a court of 70 members made up of a High Priest as presiding judge, a Religious Chamber of 23 chief priests, a Law Chamber of 23 scribes, and a Popular Chamber of 23 elders. It was to this court Jesus referred when he said he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things of the elders, chief priests, and scribes. He knew it was by their decision he would be killed.
Extreme care was used to select the judges of this great court. Each had to be at least 40 years of age with experience in at least three offices of gradually increasing dignity. Each had to be a person of unimpeachable integrity and held in highest esteem by his fellow men.
Members of the Sanhedrin acted both as judges and jurors. They did not have a separate jury. Any member with an interest or personal knowledge of the parties or facts was required to disqualify himself. The Court had to decide the question of guilt or innocence solely on evidence presented in the courtroom.
The Sanhedrin was charged under rabbinical law with the duty to protect and defend the accused. No member of the court could act entirely as an accuser or prosecutor. The law required the court to give accused persons “the benefit of doubt” and to assist the accused to establish his innocence.
The trial procedure was similar to ours. Following the preliminary hearing a summary of the evidence was given by one of the judges. Spectators were then removed from the courtroom, and the judges proceeded to ballot. A majority was sufficient to convict or acquit. If a majority voted to acquit, the trial was over then and there, and the defendant was completely exonerated. If a majority voted to convict, then a different procedure had to be followed.
No announcement of verdict could be made that day. The court had to adjourn for a full day. The judges were permitted to go to their homes but were not to allow their minds to be occupied by any business pursuits or social activities. They were to devote their time to solemn consideration and reconsideration of the evidence and return a day later to ballot again.
At this second ballot any judge voting for acquittal could not change his vote, but any judge who at the first ballot found the accused "guilty" could change his vote.
During this interim the defendant was still presumed innocent.
Another peculiar provision of Jewish law is of great importance, for a unanimous verdict of guilty resulted in acquittal of the defendant! This arose from the court’s duty to protect and defend the accused. Mosaic law held that since some member of the court had to interpose a defense for the accused, a unanimous verdict of guilty indicated no one had done this, that there could only be a conspiracy against the accused, that he had no friend or defender. Such a verdict was invalid and had the effect of an acquittal.
The Evil of Theocracy
Israel was not a democracy with church and state separate but a theocracy with church and state intertwined as one. Many believe the chief priests brought about Jesus' illegal arrest and trial, that it was they who bribed Judas, that it was they alone who were threatened by the public teachings of Jesus, that it was they alone who sought to have him put to death.
The Arrest
The arrest was illegal because it came at night in violation of law. It was effected through efforts of the conspirator Judas Iscariot in violation of rabbinical law. It was not the result of any legal mandate, again in violation of Mosaic code. The Roman guards who arrested Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane and brought him bound into the judgment hall of the high priest had been issued no lawful warrant. That the court was convened at night is further evidence of the conspiracy against Jesus by priests whose hypocrisy The Carpenter had publicly denounced.
Under the law of the Sanhedrin, the first step should have been arraignment of the prisoner, the reading of charges against him in open court. The record (including the writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Josephus, Philo, and the Dead Sea Scrolls) mentions no arraignment. I submit that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are credible witnesses. We can believe their report.
False Witnesses
The record says the court sought false witnesses against Jesus to put him to death but at first found none, though many false witnesses came. There were perjurers in the crowd but they were unwilling to risk the terrible consequence of lying against a man accused of a capital crime.
At last came two false witnesses, St. Matthew tells us. St. Mark adds that the witnesses did not agree. The first testified on the charge of blasphemy that Jesus said "I am able to destroy the temple.” The second testified that Jesus said, "I will destroy this temple." There were no witnesses but these two, and they did not agree. Jesus was entitled to acquittal without being questioned as to his defense … and certainly without being compelled to testify against himself.
Witness Against Self
But, the high priest Caiaphas called on Jesus to make a defense (contrary to the law). "The high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus saying, ‘Answerest thou nothing? What is it that these witnesses say against you?’"
Jesus made no response.
Instead of protecting and defending the accused as required by their law, the high priest himself became an accuser in utter violation of their rules of procedure. "I adjure thee by the living God," he shouted, "that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God!"
Place yourself in the position of that lowly carpenter standing before the most powerful men in the country, the highest tribunal of the nation. One can hardly imagine greater coercion and duress!
Though Jesus could remain silent, he chose to speak. "If I answer you will not believe me, and if I ask you questions you will not answer me.”
The priests again asked "Are you the Son of God?"
Jesus’ response was merely, “You have said it.”
Caiaphas then announced to the Court, "He has spoken blasphemy. What need have we of further witnesses?"
The rest of the men of that awesome court, hearing these words spoken by their high priest, unlawfully confirmed his judgment shouting, "He is guilty of death!"
This first hearing before the Sanhedrin concluded about three o'clock Friday morning. The Court adjourned only till daybreak, though the law required each of them to deliberate alone for one full day before convening for the second hearing.
They returned only a few hours later at dawn. St. Luke tells us, "As soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and scribes came together and led him into their council." This session was perfunctory. No witnesses were called. Again the law was violated by requiring Jesus to answer the repeated question, "Are you the Son of God?"
Again Jesus answered, “You say I am,” then added, “Hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power!”
At this the court shouted, "What need have we of further witnesses, for we ourselves have heard it from his own mouth!"
The ballot was then taken, the judges’ votes were registered, and Mark tells us, "They all condemned him guilty of death." The importance of this is in that peculiar provision of Jewish law that required acquittal if there was a unanimous verdict.
Under Jewish law death by stoning was the proper sentence for a capital offense. The Jewish people did not crucify, that method of inflicting the death penalty being Greek and Roman in origin. The Jews put capital convicts to death by stoning, beheading, or strangulation in accordance with the nature of the crime. Death by stoning was prescribed for blasphemy.
But, the Roman army occupying Jerusalem at the time alone had power to pronounce and carry out death sentences. The Sanhedrin merely had authority to bring its accusation before the Roman magistrate or military governor, who then had a duty to review the entire proceeding as a separate trial court with sole power to determine the matter.
Pilate’s Part in the Crime
Therefore, "in the morning the chief priests consulted with the elders and scribes, bound Jesus, carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate."
It has been said Judea gave us religion and Greece gave us the arts, but Rome gave us the law. The Roman judicial system is incomparable in the history of jurisprudence, but Pilate did not follow the Roman system. He did not exercise independent judgment according to law but gave in to political pressure from the Jewish priests, thus violating the very law he was charged to uphold. His story is an example of why judges should always be free from political pressure, free to decide cases solely on the law and evidence. As Imperial Procurator in Roman occupied Jerusalem at the time Pilate owed a legal duty to review all evidence and procedure in capital cases brought before him by the Jewish leaders. He was a good judge (until his job security was threatened by politics).
The priests took Jesus outside Pilate's palace. (They could not enter because they would be defiled to do so, it being the Feast of Passover.) Pilate went out to them saying, "What accusation bring you against this man?" This inquiry is important because it shows Pilate's intention to take the case up as trial judge from the beginning, starting with the charge itself. He did not ask, "What have you convicted his man of doing," but asked instead to know the charges.
The priests knew the import of Pilate's question, so they answered indirectly, “If he were not a malefactor we would not have delivered him to you." In other words, Pilate asked, “What is the charge against this man?" and the priests answered, “If he wasn't guilty he wouldn't be here!"
Pilate saw this attempt to limit his jurisdiction and make him a rubber stamp of their will. This angered him, and he retorted, "Then you take him. Judge him according to your law!"
The priests were now forced to admit, “It is not lawful for us to put a man to death."
Please understand the dilemma of these law-breaking priests. If they presented Jesus as a man convicted of blasphemy on the testimony of only two witnesses who did not agree, Pilate would reverse their verdict. If they presented Jesus as one convicted by his own confession, Pilate would set the verdict aside. And, of course, if they reported Jesus was convicted by unanimous vote, Pilate would enter a verdict of acquittal. So the guilty priests presented Jesus to Pilate on a new charge they trumped up on the spot: treason against Caesar.
"We found this fellow perverting the nation," they said, "forbidding others to pay taxes to Caesar, saying he himself is Christ a King."
Pilate called Jesus inside the palace and asked privately, "Are you the King of the Jews?"
Jesus asked Pilate to know the origin of the new charge. "Do you say this thing of yourself or did others tell you of it?”
Pilate replied, "Your own nation’s chief priests delivered you to me charged with treason.”
It was one thing for a Jew to accuse a Roman of treason or for a Roman to accuse a Jew, but here were the most prominent Jews of the nation accusing one of their own countrymen of the crime of treason against Rome!
Jesus said to Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world."
Pilate persisted, "Are you then a king?”
Jesus answered, "You say I am a king. I came into this world to bear witness to the truth. Everyone that is of the truth hears my voice."
Pilate then asked the famous question, "What is truth?"
Jesus gave no reply but the silent presence of Himself, the lamb led to slaughter by liars, so Pilate went outside to where the priests were waiting and, according to St. John, pronounced his first emphatic acquittal of the Nazarene carpenter. He said to them, "I find no fault in him at all!”
Thus far Pilate had followed the law to the letter. The law was good. The law would have delivered Jesus but for the persistence of these evil priests who cared nothing for the law by which they themselves sought to rule the land and all its inhabitants. It was intolerable to these enemies of truth for their murderous plot to be thwarted this way. The priests let out a roar of indignation, "His teachings stir up the people throughout our land, from Galilee to this very city."
This charge was sedition, less heinous than treason, requiring proof of a corrupt motive to convict, yet no evil motive in Jesus could be proved.
Pilate ignored this charge but in the reference to Galilee found opportunity to escape the predicament facing him. Herod, the Tetrarch of Galilee, was in Jerusalem for Passover. Pilate saw in this a chance to shift responsibility to Herod, who had jurisdiction to try sedition charges. Jesus was a Galilean. The priests approved this move because they thought Herod would do anything to gain their favor.
Jesus was dragged to Herod's palace where charges of treason and sedition were renewed.
Herod, however, was unimpressed. He’d heard of Jesus' teachings and questioned him, but when Jesus refused to answer (which was the right of every accused) Herod arrayed him in a gorgeous white robe and sent him back to Pilate without rendering a decision. I submit that if this irregular proceeding had any legal status whatever it amounted to another acquittal. Pilate agreed. St. Luke tells us when the priests brought Jesus back from Herod, Pilate went out to them and said, "You have brought this man to me as one who perverts the people, yet having examined him before you I find no fault touching those things whereof you accuse him. No, nor does Herod find anything worthy of death. I will therefore chastise him and release him."
Please notice that Pilate now made an error. He pronounced, "This man is innocent. Herod found him innocent, and I find him innocent. I will therefore chastise him and release him!"
By what authority could Pilate lawfully chastise an innocent man? Why did he do this?
Though contrary to Roman law, I believe Pilate did this hoping chastisement would satisfy the priests so they would cease their demands for death. So, Pilate had Jesus chastised, not with a slap on the wrist but by whipping him almost to death with leather strips impregnated with pieces of lead! I submit the infliction of this illegal flogging was itself a bar to further punishment. Anything more constituted double jeopardy prohibited at the time by laws of both Israel and Rome.
St. John says that “from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him,” but Jesus was led to the guards’ barrack room, stripped of the white robe Herod gave him, covered with a castoff cloak of purple, crowned with a wreath of thorns, given a reed for a scepter, and led out to be confronted by the angry priests again.
Pilate announced, "Behold, the man."
The Priests Demand Death
The priests replied, "Crucify him!" All because Jesus challenged their authority, men who were willing to go outside the law to cause his death, men who thereby violated their authority.
Pilate then said, “You take him and crucify him. I find no fault in him." Here is a judge of the law saying, “This man is innocent, but you may put him to death if you wish.”
Of course this didn’t satisfy the priests. They did not dare crucify Jesus without absolute, unequivocal sanction of the Roman authority, for to do so would subject them to reprisal, possibly even death at the hands of the Romans.
"We have a law,” they insisted, “and by our law he ought to die because he made himself the Son of God." In saying this they revealed to Pilate that their true complaint against Jesus was actually the charge of blasphemy.
Pilate, who’d not yet heard this charge, took Jesus aside once more and asked, “Whence art thou?" This was equivalent to our modern question, “Where are you coming from? What are you all about?” Pilate wanted to know what Jesus could have possibly done to so anger the priests that they would violate their nation’s sacred code to have him put to death unlawfully.
Jesus made no response at all.
Pilate then thundered, "Dare you refuse to answer me? Do you not know I have power to crucify you and also power to set you free?”
Jesus answered only, “You have no power but what you receive from above.”
Pilate again sought to release Jesus, but the enraged priests exclaimed, "If you release this man you are no friend of Caesar!” They threatened Pilate. There could be grave consequences if the highest court in Israel reported Pilate to Caesar. Pilate feared a wrong interpretation of his judgment might reach Caesar. He might be seen protecting one considered by the most influential of his own countrymen to be guilty of treason. Pilate lacked the courage to stand up for justice against these angry priests.
It was then Pilate’s wife sent him a message. "Have nothing to do with this just man.”
Her appeal led Pilate to make one last effort to save Jesus without jeopardizing his job. It was the custom during Passover to liberate a prisoner selected by the people. By popular vote the people could, in effect, grant amnesty to anyone sentenced to die. I think this to be one of the most dramatic moments in all history, yet much of the drama has been overlooked by authors and playwrights, and much regrettable confusion has resulted in 2,000 years of unnecessary animosity between Christians and Jews.
It was the Jewish priests who sought Jesus’ death, not the jewish people.
The name Barabbas in Hebrew means son of Abbas. Peter is referred to by St. Matthew as “Peter bar Jonah", Peter son of Jonah. Bar Mitzvah literally translated Son of the Commandments. Barrabas’ name was also Jesus. Jesus Barabbas.
Pilate's question to the priests was, "Whom shall I release? Jesus Barabbas or Jesus who is called Christ?"
They called, of course, for release of Barabbas, the notorious robber and murderer.
"What shall I do then with Jesus who is called Christ?" Pilate asked.
They shouted, "Crucify him!"
"Shall I crucify your King?" Pilate asked.
And those priests (who despised Caesar as only conquered persons can hate) told Pilate, "We have no king but Caesar!"
Judicial Fear
Pilate weakened in the face of their unrelenting ferocity. He turned Jesus over to them to be crucified. He took a basin of water before them, washed his hands in it, and announced, “I am innocent of the blood of this just person. You see to it.”
Pilate had engraved on the cross "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews". Caiaphas and the other priests went to Pilate and urged, "Write not ‘King of the Jews’ but that he said he is King of the Jews."
Pilate answered, "I have written what I have written."
Conclusion
Jesus was judged before his trial. He was charged with three separate crimes. The priests of the Sanhedrin illegally convicted him of blasphemy. Pilate refused to recognize this initial proceeding. Pilate twice acquitted Jesus of the charge of treason. He was charged with sedition before both Pilate and Herod but was acquitted by each. Yet Jesus was executed under the pretense that he had been found guilty of treason. Threatened with possible loss of his position, Pilate chose to crucify Jesus as the easiest way to silence the angry priests.
Before noon that same day Jesus was crucified in violation of the laws of Israel and Rome, closing the darkest chapter in the history of judicial administration and sounding the greatest call the world will ever hear for humans to work together for human justice.
Two of the most enlightened systems of law that ever existed were prostituted to destroy the most innocent man who ever lived.
This story will never die, for from its truth forever springs the hope of all mankind. More than any other story in the history of the world, the trial of Jesus calls all men and women of good faith to work for that system of human government whereby we may live together in peace and safety under the Rule of Law administered with reverence for truth and love of mercy.
![In Defense of Ye: Don’t Throw the Bab[Ye] Out with the Bathwater.](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/61d38745900a3353ddd77f40/1666402374900-1GSML4UNWJ8QW2X9IDCV/Screen+Shot+2022-10-21+at+6.32.09+PM.png)
In Defense of Ye: Don’t Throw the Bab[Ye] Out with the Bathwater.
Ye, the billionaire music mogul and modern day Beethoven, formerly known as Kanye West, has been acting very Ye as of late. As the editor-in-chief of this e-magazine, I’m not going to make this article about Ye’s alleged “anti-semitism.” Instead, I would like to address something else—Ye’s point:
In a nutshell, Ye is trying to clean the music that hurts the Black community. (If you don’t think music affects the listener, you’re ignorant.) If you ask me, Ye’s message was the most pro-Black message I’ve ever heard, but the ignorant masses have been led to believe that what Ye said was anti-semitic. Without a doubt, Ye directed his message at the Jewish lawyers and owners at the top of the music industry, but only in defense of his own tribe and people. To add insult to injury, Ye was cancelled by his own Black community, compatriots, and confidants (e.g. Revolt Media taking down the interview and apologizing for it even though their slogan is “unapologetically hip hop”), not the “Jewish Media.”
Ye is pro-semite, but even if he were anti-semitic, that isn’t the conversation we should be having. The real conversation we should be having is this: Why are the lyrics to every rap song “Imma fuck yo bitch” and “Imma kill this nigga”?
The 10 Greatest Slaps in Pop History with Critical Analysis
The 10 Best Slaps in Pop History with Analysis
Disclaimer: The Reading Railroad and its contributors do not condone violence, especially against women and children, but we do not consider a good, quality, open-handed slap to the face violence. In other words, we here at the reading railroad condone a good slap to the face, 100%. We consider slaps a net positive to planet Earth as, most of the time, they are necessary, just, and educational. With that being said, let’s jump into our countdown of the greatest slaps in pop history and see if we can learn some things from these historic slaps.
10. Airplane!
The reason these Airplane! slaps are so good is because they send a message. When a plane is experiencing some turbulence, the last thing a person wants to hear is a hysterical woman screaming. Say a prayer, get right with God, and shut the fuck up.
Lesson: If you don’t get a hold of yourself, get slapped. The message was delivered, too. The woman shut up.
9. Lamelo Ball
The moment I saw this slap, I knew this kid was destined for greatness. As Sun Tzu said, “The worst calamities that befall an army arise from hesitation.” Notice how there was not even a single millisecond of hesitation after the opponent bopped the back of his head. LaMelo ended up getting ejected and his team ended up losing the game, but that’s besides the point. As the saying goes: “Sometimes you gotta lose the battle to win the war.” He sent a message to all opponents across time: disrespect me, get clapped. It didn’t matter that the opponent was much older and larger than the 17-year-old LaMelo. It didn’t matter that LaMelo was in a foreign land and didn’t know the language or customs. It didn’t matter that he’d be ejected and that there would be inevitable consequences with the coaches and league. The only thing that mattered is that his opponent crossed his line, and LaMelo was willing to risk everything to defend that line. He has hard, non-negotiable boundaries, and that’s respectable. His opponents might not like him, but at least they’ll respect him.
One last detail: notice the speed and accuracy of the slap. LaMelo is right-handed yet he lands a perfect slap with his left. This slap is easily a 10 out of 10. If I had to make a bet, I’d say this kid will become 8-time league MVP if he stays healthy. Mark my words.
Lesson: Slap whoever crosses your line, no matter what the consequences may be. In the end, you’ll become 8-time league MVP.
This is by far the most cathartic slapping experience on the list. To supply some context, this is an Australian comedy bit that was inspired by a real TV show entitled The Slap, a drama centered around the ethics of slapping a brat child. Did I watch the series The Slap? Hell no. I saw the commercial for it and thought to myself: “All these grownups crying over a brat child being slapped need to get slapped themselves,” and God delivereth and gave the world this comedy sketch. Thank you, Jesus. [Tangent: Why do you think Jesus said to “turn the other cheek”? Because he liked seeing people get slapped. Duh. Also, probably because the person being slapped deserves another one. People that get slapped, nine times out of ten, truly deserve it, so own up and turn the other cheek. You most probably deserve it.] Sometimes, one slap just isn’t enough and this sketch epitomizes it. If the slapper from the original TV show slapped more people, maybe the show would have had more views than the parody… but it didn’t.
Lesson: More slaps. Slap more people. Slap everybody.
P.S. Also, I really despise the Australian police, so seeing a whole bunch of them get slapped at the end was good for my soul. It filleth my cup. Thank you, God.
7. Andrew Tate
Unlike the other slaps in this list, this video needs no context whatsoever, and even if there was more to what the Top G was saying, I don’t care. This was all I needed to hear to become inspired. I might get Tate’s wisdom tattooed on my forehead so these bitches know what’s up from the jump: “Slap. Slap. Grab. Choke. Shut up, bitch. Sex.” Let these bitches no.
Apparently, his slaps are so great that the beta cucks in charge of these social media platforms had to cancel him. Luckily, they’ll never be able to cancel his clips, and God pray these clips never get scrubbed from the Internet. Long live Cobra Tate.
Lesson: If we don’t slap more beta cucks, we will lose free speech completely.
6. This penguin
Sometimes, being petty is necessary. This penguin was just chilling in solitude, stoically contemplating its cold, bleak existence when this other–clearly mopey–penguin waddles into his proximity unnecessarily, with poor energy, obviously trying to get attention. The stoic penguin said: “You want attention. I’ll give you attention—SLAP!--Miss me with that mopey shit.”
Lesson: Don’t be a mopey little penguin. Life sucks. Get over it. Stand up straight. Keep your negative energy away from me, or get slapped.
The context: Nipsey Hussle is about to perform at this award show and needs to park his Maybach. Nip’s personal bodyguard and/or driver picks up a traffic cone to move it out of the way and looks to be handing it to a worker, as if to say, “I don’t know where you’d like this cone to go; you’re an employee working this event; I trust that you are the person to hand it to; I’m going to get Nip to where he needs to be.” The worker, presumably the parking lot attendant or event security staff—who takes his title and job a little too seriously—took this gesture as a sign of disrespect, and slapped the cone out of Nip’s bodyguard's hand, which is incredibly disrespectful. That’s where the security guard fucked up. Maybe he thought he was protected behind that little security badge of his because what the attendant did, in reality, was challenge Nip’s team to a physical altercation. (Man to man, you don’t just slap something out of somebody’s hand and not expect there to be physical consequences.) These guys are Rollin’ 60’s Neighborhood Crips. Respect is the code, and that poor man didn’t know that God had blessed Nipsey Hussle with lightning fast hands. As you can see for yourself, Nipsey introduced the security guard to the stars. The crisp and sharp thunder that radiated off that guy’s cheek… God bless him. If you watch it in slow motion, you can see that the parking lot security guard was nearly KO’d. The coup de grace: Nipsey was wearing socks and slides!
People might say that Nip’s slap was unnecessary or that it’s sad or unsavory that somebody as wealthy and successful as Nip is slapping parking lot security guards. To these haters I say this: the security guy asked for it. Honor knows no class and is blind to status. Nipsey Hussle’s bodyguard moved a traffic cone and handed it to the security guard, and the security guard had a little power trip. The security guard learned real fast that he was fucking with a king and his men. Also, if you want to look at it from this privileged- or status-oriented perspective, Nipsey Hussle defended his own bodyguard. In other words, he was willing to sacrifice himself completely, i.e. fight, take the charge, get arrested, and/or get sued, for the man in service to him. That’s Godly.
Lesson: Don’t disrespect the king’s men.
R.I.P. King
4. Vince Offer, a.k.a. The Shamwow, Slap Chop, and Schticky Guy
Arguably the greatest salesman of all time, Vince Offer, gave us some of the greatest slaps TV watchers of the early 2000’s ever witnessed. This guy’s slaps made everybody’s troubles go away. He reminded us that our lives are boring because we don’t slap shit enough. He was so proficient with his slaps that he could slap his nuts with one finger. But, apparently Vince flew too close to the sun with all the slapping and allegedly slapped the shit out of some hooker. Do I think he was wrong for it? Absolutely not. She deserved it. Apparently the whore was biting the shit out of his tongue and face like some bath salt-smoking zombie. I’d have slapped the living fuck out of her too. What was he supposed to do, lose his tongue–his moneymaker?
Lesson: Vince Offer should have taken Andrew Tate’s advice—“Slap. Slap. Grab. Choke. Shut up, bitch. Sex.” Also, don’t kiss whores. Why was he kissing a whore anyway? Don’t you know where that mouth has been? I’d have slapped her for even trying to give me a smooch.
Speaking of charges, do you have legal issues? Maybe you slapped a bitch? Maybe a bitch clapped you? Regardless of your legal situation, there is a course for you:
Learn how to win in court without a lawyer. Even if you don’t currently have any cases on the docket, learn about your rights and the real power you have as a United States citizen in this easily digestible and empowering legal course.
3. Sean Connery
I’ll let 007 speak for himself here. (Click on the image to hear from James Bond himself.)
Lesson: Slapping a woman with an open hand can absolutely be merited.
2. Rick James
This is hands down the funniest slap on the list, and it’s definitely the best slap story ever told. The only reason it’s not number one is because Rick James’ slap wasn’t justified against Charlie Murphy, a.k.a. Darkness. Thank God he slapped Charlie Murphy, a world renown griot, because the world got a side-splitting, belly-howling story out of it–a story so funny, it became part of pop culture. Now, when people hear the name Rick James, they think of Charlie Murphy’s story and not Rick James’ music. That’s the power of a slap, and that’s the power of storytelling.
Lesson: Slaps are awesome, but a great slap story is even better.
Rest in peace, Kings.
Are you surprised that Will Smith’s Oscar slap is number one? I’m not. I made the list.
Whether you are Team Will or Team Rock, this is “the greatest and most impactful slap the world has ever witnessed” according to Winchester Banks, a centenarian Western historian and 4-time slap boxing champion (2011, 2012, 2013, 2015) of the United Kingdom’s southwestern district in the 80+ category. For an in-depth analysis of the greatest slap of all time, read Winchester Bank’s analysis of Will Smith’s historic slap here.
Lesson: Tell a bad joke, get clapped.
What do you think? Is there a slap that I missed? Was Will Smith’s slap the greatest of all time?
Review of HowToWinInCourt.com
Disclaimer: In the spirit of complete transparency, I get a commission each time a person clicks on the affiliate link and makes a purchase. That being said, I wouldn’t recommend something that didn’t work or wasn’t worth it.
The proof is in the pudding: I beat the charges “pro se,” i.e. all on my own, without legal representation, and, if I do say so myself, against all odds, and it’s all thanks to HowToWinInCourt.com.
As much as I’d like to credit my legal victory to my supreme genius and ultimate innocence, the reality is that I’m an ignoramus and I couldn’t have won without this course. I was arguably guilty on all five counts against me: assault (x2), trespassing, resisting arrest, and disorderly conduct. (It’s a long story.)
The deck was stacked against me big time: there were two “witnesses” testifying against me, at least six arresting officers who I insulted, ridiculed, and pissed off with my obstinance, obvious political differences with the judges (another long story in itself), my requests for a public defender were denied, and one more minor detail–my arrest made the news. When your arrest is headline news, your case is referred to as a “media case” and this just means that the prosecutors see you as a prize and are more incentivized to make an example out of you.
Yes, this is my ugly mug that made the news.
Even with all these factors against me, I still won, and I couldn’t have done it without this course.
How To Win In Court looks like an outdated website, but that’s exactly why I trusted it–the lawyer who created the course Dr. Frederick David Graves, JD (BAR #: 558583. See at www.FloridaBar.org) has been in business for over 30 years and the website proves it. His experience in law, easy to follow legal instruction, and fatherly wisdom and advice on legal strategy saved me thousands of dollars, saved me from having a criminal record, and it saved me my career.
This course is very comprehensive, and it’s loaded with legal modules for whatever a person’s situation may be. Here’s a list of everything the course offers:
Even after I beat my case, I found myself on Dr. Graves’ website because I found his lessons genuinely interesting and worth learning about. For instance, there is a short bonus unit on the trial of Jesus Christ. I grew up in the Christian faith, and never did I have His trial explained to me so succinctly and objectively as it was explained to me in this course. Also, there were historical, theological, and Jewish legal elements about His trial that I had no idea about, like the politics of the Sanhedrin. (Insert mind-exploding emoji here). The fact that Jesus’ legal battle was explained by an objective lawyer just reaffirmed my faith in the Gospel, and it also taught me that even the most innocent of men can be crucified by the state. Let this be a lesson. Learn how the game is played.
If you or somebody you know and care about are experiencing legal problems or are in the middle of a legal battle, please share this article or link with them.
Course link: https://www.howtowinincourt.com/frameset.cfm?mTitle=StartHere&refercode=LC0042
Conclusion:
The $249 saved me—at least $5000.
I highly recommend this course for anybody in a legal bind – criminal, civil, family court, foreclosure, etc. As crazy as it may sound, I would even recommend this course to law students and practicing lawyers and judges. The creator of this course breaks down the legal system in digestible language and teaches the fundamentals of jurisprudence and how people win in the court of law.
Obviously, I found this course incredibly helpful. It gives anybody, even a dummy like me, a fighting chance, even with the odds stacked against them. It taught me the rules (e.g. procedures, discovery, etc.), helped me create a legal strategy, and, in the end, I won on my terms.
To be honest, even if you decide to spend the money on retaining a lawyer or if the state grants you a public defender, I’d still recommend purchasing this course to keep your lawyer in check. A lot of people hire lawyers, or the state appoints the defendant a lawyer, and they still lose. As a matter of fact, it happens all of the time. (Let’s not forget, a lot of innocent people are behind bars right now, some even on death row. Don’t let that be you.) Don’t be a sucker. Don’t buy into these lawyers’ fear tactics. I spoke with so many criminal defense attorneys, and they all tried to scare me into giving them money. Don’t listen to them. You can win without a lawyer. I am proof.
One last thing:
When you purchase the course, you can become an affiliate and earn income like me every time somebody purchases the course. I didn’t even know about this until after I beat my case. I kind of stumbled upon it afterward as I perused the site. So, assuming you don’t even have legal issues, you can earn a side income simply by promoting the course. It’s not a pyramid scheme. I will make no money off of your sales. It’s literally just a referral code that everybody gets when they purchase the course. If you tell somebody about the course and they buy it, you get paid, and if you’re good at sales and/or advertising, you can make a pretty penny. Just saying.
If you’d like to know more about my own legal battle, here’s a link to my e-book about my case: The Great Offense.
In Defense of Will Smith: The Slap that Rocked the World
Whether you are appalled by Will Smith’s actions or not, his slap is the greatest slap, hands down, that has ever happened. Bravo, Will. Bravo! His slap deserved the standing ovation, not his Oscar speech.
[If you’re lazy and don’t like reading, you can purchase the author’s audio defense of Will Smith here and listen to it any time. It’s not the same, this article is definitely better, but there still are some good punch lines.]
The man won the most prestigious award an actor can receive just moments later, and people pretended to care. What they really cared about was his slap, and rightfully so. It was a slap so great that it instantly erased all the praise and accolades of Will’s entire career. It will, inevitably, become his legacy. Nothing he has ever done nor anything he could ever do will top this slap. Will Smith really is Legend. The only thing better than owning the title of best slap in the history of the world is, maybe, becoming heavyweight champion of the world, but even then the belt is a horny mistress and will only remain attached to a person’s hip for so long, that is until the next heavyweight takes her from you. Slap king, however… I don’t think anybody can ever take this crown from his head.
Understand, a slap of that magnitude created a bigger shockwave to Planet Earth than most earthquakes. Remember Haiti in 2010? Exactly. You probably don’t, but it was reported that about 300,000 people died from it. The country is still decimated and hurting from it more than a decade later, but everybody that lives outside of that island couldn’t care less and, if they did hear about it, they soon forgot about it. But will mankind ever forget or be able to unhear the “Slap Heard ‘Round the World”? Never. It’s up there with 9/11.
Okay… maybe I went a little too far with that last joke, but at least it was kind of funny, comparing Will Smith’s slap to 9/11. There's definitely some morbid humor in there, but at least you can call it humorous. Chris Rock’s joke, on the other hand, wasn’t funny at all. I think Will Smith was justified in slapping him simply because the joke was that stupid. Let’s subtract Jada’s feelings completely from this equation for just a moment: Chris Rock deserved to get thwapped in the face on live TV on arguably the grandest stage in all of the world simply because the audience will never be able to unhear such an unfunny joke. It’s almost like being exposed to that horrid video “Two Girls, One Cup.” (If you don’t know what I’m referencing here, consider yourself blessed and never—AND I MEAN NEVER!—look that up. You’ll never be able to unsee it.)
Get clapped, Chris Rock. Because of you, her new nickname is G.I. Jada.
If you ask me, Will Smith did the right thing, which is a very unpopular opinion apparently, but I’ll touch on that a little later in the ethics section of this article. First, as a historian and 4-time slap boxing champion, I’d like to analyze the slap itself.
Technique: when it comes to form, the slap was magnificent. His swing was so fast that slow motion couldn't even capture it on camera. It’s like that frame-by-frame security camera footage of the plane crashing into the Pentagon: in one frame there is peace, and the next frame utter horror and devastation. The impact itself, too fast for tape. The slap was so fast and unexpected that people started conspiracy theorizing about it immediately, like: “It was all staged! This was an inside job! It wasn’t Will Smith that slapped Chris Rock, it was Bush!” Actually, guys, it was just a perfect slap, so perfect that it’s hard to even believe. Now, unfortunately, thanks to Will, the TSA will be telling people to take off their shoes and fondling our scrotums just to get inside a theater. You’ll see. His slap had such an impact that it’ll change the way we operate in society. But I digress…
Also, the setup for the slap couldn’t have been more ideal. The way Chris Rock’s head was just bowing before Will, his hands behind his back, completely defenseless, with his huge shit-eating grin, standing there like a golf ball waiting to get sent, and how Will walked right up and teed off. Watching this slap on repeat was like watching Tiger Woods highlights. His follow through and body mechanics were supreme. Like, Will, have you spent 10,000 hours practicing your slap game in the gym or what?
Ethics: the vast majority of people condemned Will Smith for the slap and, since, Will Smith has even apologized for his actions. If you ask me, his apology is what he should be apologizing for. You read that correctly. His apology is what he should be sorry about. Why would you apologize for the greatest slap of all time? To be politically correct? No, bro. Own that shit. Stop being so Hollywood and be more West Philadelphia. That crown is yours forever, and I dare somebody try and take it from you.
Will, honestly, you need a new publicist. (I know a guy. Just give me a ring.) You have the wrong people in your ear and in your corner. You need to start speaking from the heart and stop speaking from the script. What you should have said is something along these lines:
“Yeah, I slapped him. Felt pretty good, too. The little fucker deserved it. It was a stupid joke. As a matter of fact, I’ve never heard a stupider joke. That alone deserved a slap. I didn’t even slap him for Jada. I slapped him because the joke was that stupid. Fuck Jada. I don’t even like the bitch, but she’s my wife, so I had to do what I had to do.”
Of course I’m joking a little bit, but, honestly, I agree with the ethics behind Will Smith defending his wife with physical violence. That’s his bald wife. What’s he supposed to do, just let a bully sarcastically punch down on her because she has physical defects? Fuck no. You definitely have to slap the fucker who is talking shit. I don’t care if it was Chris Rock or Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, somebody’s getting slapped.
Regardless of Will and Jada’s marital “entanglements”–which I’m not going to touch with a ten foot pole; that is nobody’s business but their own–they have vows and oaths to one another. That means something. As a matter of fact, that means everything. To me that means: you hurt my wife, physically or emotionally, we are going to have a problem, i.e. I’m going to slap the shit out of you publicly. They also have children together. What message would that send his children, him sitting idly by, like a nutless cuckl, as an unfunny clown picks on his wife? Exactly. There is only one proper response to that kind of nonsense—SLAP!
You know what the best part of Will Smith’s slap was? No, it wasn’t the tuxedos and glamour. No, it wasn’t his form or follow through (though that was mechanically idilic). No, it wasn’t that it was televised live from the Oscars. No. The best part of the slap was that Will Smith didn’t get arrested. I heard a lot of people say that he should have been arrested, and, honestly, he’d have a little more respect on his name if he had been arrested, like a true quixotic hero defending Dulcinea’s honor, but God had another plan. The police stood down, and Will was rewarded and got to party and celebrate all night long. To be honest, I’m happy for him. Like I said, he’d be more cool if he got arrested, but that wasn’t up to him. That was in God’s hands. Apparently God agrees with me (or I agree with God) and He decided that no man, great or small, should be arrested for slapping another man.
So, here is the new law of the land, as told to me via God Himself: Humans are allowed to slap our fellow man from this day forward and not face any legal action (as long as no physical injuries are sustained). If Will Smith can slap a man on live television with–literally–millions of witnesses, and not even catch a single charge, then so too can every person on Earth. Slapping, from this day forth, is completely decriminalized. Will Smith’s non-case set the precedent for all mankind.
From the bottom of my heart, thank you, Will Smith. Your slap just changed the world for the better, and by God, was it necessary. A lot of people out there have never been slapped in the face and it shows. We have some catching up to do folks. Just look at the world around you. The next time somebody disrespects you, trounces on your rights, or makes a stupid joke, please, for the love of God, slap that person right across the face. If a slap is merited, you have the right. God said you’re allowed to now. God ordained it through Will.
Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer, but I’m pretty sure that, because of Will Smith, we can get away with slapping people nowadays. Go test it out for yourself, and if you do somehow end up getting arrested and have to go to court for your actions, purchase this course that teaches you how to win in court without a lawyer.
It’ll spare you the cost of a lawyer and, most likely, get you off the hook. But don’t take my word for it; read this guy’s personal testimony who was charged for allegedly assaulting two staff members at the historic Gammage Theater during the Hamilton play and ultimately arrested because of covid mandates. Apparently the retard won, so the program must really work.
What do you think? Would Will Smith have slapped Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson if Dwayne had told the same sorry-ass joke?
Mandate Ruins Man’s Date: a.k.a. The Gandalf Standoff
AZ Teacher arrested at ‘Hamilton’ show for not complying with ASU’s mask mandate; disputes ABC 15’s story
AZ teacher and Arizona State University alumnus, Connor David Loretz, denies both counts of assault, trespassing, and resisting arrest, but admits he was disorderly “only in conduct, not dress.”
Mr. Loretz, a self-proclaimed Hamilton ‘Stan’ and high school English teacher who graduated from ASU with a bachelor’s degree in literature before getting his master’s degree in secondary education, claims, with the conviction and hubris of Don Quixote, to have been “better dressed than anybody there” while attending the Saturday matinée showing of Hamilton at ASU’s historic Gammage Theatre. “Second only to my date,” he finishes his thought. “Unfortunately, my date and I forgot to take pictures of ourselves before the concert. I guess we were having too much fun to even think about it. Now, it seems the only picture that’ll last from that night is my huge, unamused mug.” Then Mr. Loretz adds, “That and the media’s inaccurate portrayal of my character.”
When prompted about what his outfit had to do with the incident, he clarifies: “It shows that I was geeked about this show. I don’t wear my cufflinks and my leather Oxfords [referring to his date shoes] but a couple times a year. I wasn’t there to disrupt anything, but I couldn’t, in the spirit of the show, abide by some arbitrary mask mandate, especially when I’m fitted like Alexander Hamilton.”
Mr. Loretz claims that he felt compelled to speak up about his arrest because, as he puts it, he didn’t want anybody else to be in control of his story—an allusion to Lin Manuel Miranda’s (via George Washington) song, “History Has Its Eyes on You”—one of Hamilton’s central themes.
Mr. Loretz starts his version of the story at the end: “The first thing that I thought was misleading about ABC 15’s reporting was how the reporter mentioned the crowd cheering at my removal. That’s really flattering and all, but the crowd was cheering for George Washington [who had just come on stage]. The cheers had nothing to do with my arrest, I promise you.” Mr. Loretz, pauses, grabs his morning brew and returns. “People boo in the theatre when they don’t like something. All I heard was cheers.”
He continues: “The news is spreading an inaccurate narrative, conflating the idea of a regular man not wearing a mask with danger, public shame, and ridicule. All those people under-dressed and wearing their masks at the Hamilton show should be the ones ashamed of themselves, not me.”
“All this nonsense for simply saying no?” He claims. “At least I know my grandmother is smiling down from Heaven at all this. Love you, Grandmother Dear. My aunts and uncles might be ashamed, but I know Grandmother Dear is hooting and hollering about all this.” As an aside: “She was a genius—the first woman to graduate with honors from Stanford, as the family fable goes, and she didn’t put up with any bullshit. I learned from her. If I put on that mask, I would have been disrespecting granny, and that just wasn’t going to happen.” When asked what her name was in order to fact check the honorary claims, he stated: “Her name was ‘Grandmother Dear,’ maiden name ‘Rosie the Riveter.’ She’s the reason I’m alive, but that’s a-whole-nother story.”
“From what I’ve heard, the news is blowing everything out of proportion.” When asked if he’s seen the news, he said: “Just that one ABC article that set the whole thing ablaze, but I’ve been getting calls and texts nonstop. People have been telling me what [the news] been sayin'.”
“The actual incident wasn’t even as cool as they make it sound,” Mr. Loretz claims. “They made me sound like Harrison Bergeron in there, but I think a more accurate depiction of my demeanor is Rosa Parks or Donda.” Then, as if listening to the spirit of Kanye himself: “I mean that.”
In response to the two misdemeanor counts of assault, he claims that “the little security staff (referring to a house manager at Gammage) sacrificed her whole little body and jumped right into the big, heavy door I was opening,” implying that the door hit her and that he did not put his hands on her, despite what has been claimed in ABC’s initial reports. “She took one for the team, like that Scott Pilgrim guy from BYU,” Mr. Loretz stated (obviously confusing Scott Pilgrim, the movie, with Scott Sterling, the man, myth, and legend).
“What a hero,” he reflects, staring into the back of his mind, before snapping back to reality. “Scott [Sterling], not her,” in clarification.
An ABC 15 news article states that before the staff member fell to the ground, she “stood in front of the [auditorium] door to prevent Mr. Loretz from entering.” Mr. Loretz claims that this is just another inaccuracy in the report, specifically the timing: “Before the ‘Gandalf Standoff,’ she had already biffed herself into the door and then flopped like Lebron James. She was being very dramatic the whole time.”
According to Mr. Loretz, after she got to her feet: “It was a scene fresh out of Once Upon a Tarantino Film [sic] in Hollywood. I told her ‘I’m going in and you’re not going to stop me,’ but, like Gandalf the Grey, she was like: ‘Thou shalt not pass!’ and I was like, ‘Bet.’ I grabbed the door handle again, and I pulled it open ever so gently—because I’m dressed like a gallant knight, so I’m behaving like one, and because I’m a monster of a man and she’s a small female. [...] Passing her was not hard. With just the touch of my index finger on the door’s handle, combined with the laws of physics and leverage, I softly scooted her body with the door with the grace of a mother trying not to wake their newborn from a nap. She slid delicately like a little wooden doorstop atop cool, polished concrete.” He adds, “If there was contact, it was on her end, but, unlike Lebron, I don’t flop when I get touched. Then, long story short, I slam dunked my wagon [slang for buttocks] into my seat like Charles Barkley.”
When asked about the house manager’s feelings: “She will be alright. She will bounce back, and evolve into ‘Gandalf the Great.’ The people will love her for standing in front of a big bear. I even respect her for that. I just wish she was on the right team. We can use some more Gandalfs.”
He states: “One thing I’m a buck on [i.e. 100 percent certain about] is that I did not put my hands on her, unless it was to help her up off the ground after she kamikazeed the door and floor with her body. [...] I wasn’t even really that fazed by her, which is probably what set her off more than anything else. People hate hearing ‘no.’ But, saying no, that’s my right, and my right has the right of way when it meets your pride in the intersection.[…] I was pretty calm and collected during the whole incident until the cops interrupted my date and arrested me. That’s when I became disorderly, I’ll admit. I was a gentleman up until that point, honestly. They just wouldn’t leave this issue alone.”
When asked about the second account of assault, he responds: “I have no idea what that’s about. Does it have something to do with breathing common air?” he asks, then, abruptly, “People are more afraid about losing their jobs/careers than they are of this virus. What’s that tell you? I’ve already had students who have been required—against their beliefs—to become vaccinated as a condition of work or for their prospective careers. They don’t want to, but [they] are in a position where they can’t say no. I actually care about this stuff. This is wrong.”
He pauses to refill his coffee cup, explaining that he hasn’t had a good night’s rest since before the show.
“The real story should be the irony of the whole situation,” he states. When asked what he meant, he stated: “What play were we attending?”
In response to the charge of criminal trespassing, he states: “They arrested me in the seat in which I had a ticket, so you tell me if that sounds like trespassing.”
He claims that he did not know that the venue required masks, but stated that he still would not have worn one even if he knew, citing Governor Doug Ducey’s August 16th executive order on the issue and, this time with a little more humor and a little less hubris, “It wouldn’t have complimented my [out]fit.”
“It’s about principle,” he said. “I told that little [house manager] that I wasn’t going to wear a mask, but she just kept pestering me. Again, I told her I wasn’t going to wear one, simple and plain. Then I said, ‘Let it go,’ but she wouldn’t let it go. Gandalf [referring to the house manager] never considered whether I had any health issues.” When asked if he did have any medical issues that would justify him not wearing a mask, he said, “Mind your business.” There was a pause, then, “Just kidding.” The tension released, and he continued, “I have had a heart problem, ever since Kobe died.” He pivots and then jumps back into the story: “‘Leave me alone,' I said, but she wouldn’t leave me alone, so I just kept walking to my seat.”
Toward the end of his soliloquy, he states: “As she was pestering me in the halls of Gammage, I asked her if she was a fan of Hamilton. She said yes. Then, I asked her if she thought Hamilton would be caught dead wearing a mask inside ASU Gammage today. Again, she said yes. I said: ‘[makes buzzer noise] Incorrect.’ She has never seen Hamilton.” He concludes: “Aaron Burr was a mask wearer, not Alexander Hamilton. It was just after that little dialogue that she called the cops on me, approximately a whole minute before she jumped into the door I was opening.”
What do you think? Would Alexander Hamilton have worn a mask?